To Ben: 1. Don't do help options wich just open some help file. I hate to see again this childish work. Consider opening help on selected in redit API (or Masm32) function. If you're not able to - I can code it for you. 2. Make proc (and/or label) jumping. You can do it by searching though text for lines having 'proc' or ':' and puting it (parts of lines) into some combibox or whatever. With service for the user to choose one from list and then your code make caret jump to the line relative to the line (maybe even select the line, I think it's would be better - easier to spot). 3. Finish at least options you fill menu with. Good luck - don't stop - don't talk - CODE! Visiably it looks already well - ascetic and proffetional. Don't do too many option - just absolutly nassesery - it makes it's easier to use. Priority will always be (wether it's Pascal or C or Asm) - Fast brousing - Advanced HELP service - Customisable building options. Consider options to paste some code from tamplates that user can write - but don't write code for them! It's for VB programmers not for real asm coders! 'Cause amoung other things we have advantage of making language logic ourselfs, adapting low level logic of compilers of other languages ONLY IF WE WANT IT! All this "clear coding" talks just excuses from those hwo can not comprehend other proc style than VC++ produce. Chineese is not clear for me too, but I'm not saying it's bad therefor. I adapt best (IMHO) parts of HLL (including VC++) proc teq. but let myself write other style if I find it's better (and there are lots of cases when it is). So I wouldn't like if IDE write code for me the other thing - I would love if it provides service to group, search and paste my pieces of code. And organize it in some customizible way. Good luck again!
Posted on 2001-02-13 13:51:00 by The Svin
cyberben, First please understand my comments are purely meant as 'bug reports' and not a slam. I think can see where you are going, and think it's a good place to head. Just a further comment on wheel scrolling: Your app IS slow, open an app in your IDE, and another in Quick Editor. See how slow yours goes compared to QE. BTW, Icz's text highlighting tut is about as slow as your app, so this is probably all due to a highlight peanity. Personally, the only highlighting I would want is RED for the first time a constant, pointer, struct member, etc is used... so if anything outside of a declare is red, I see a problem without compiling. But that's me. :-) Looking good, now stop reading this and go code like Svin said! lol
Posted on 2001-02-13 22:15:00 by Ernie
As I already stated in my syntax hilighting tutorial, the only way to make syntax hilighting real fast is to code your own edit control. The alternative is to use CodeMax, a free edit control. Check it out at http://www.winmain.com
Posted on 2001-02-14 02:24:00 by Iczelion
I don't know about you, but I hate the fact that so many IDEs are coming out. None of them compare to what I can accomplish with UltraEdit. Rather than having a million ASM IDEs, all the people who want to program one, should get together and do a single one. That way, we could get a good IDE fast and load it with lots of features.
Posted on 2001-02-14 10:19:00 by Hel
I've contacted some people and asked the same already. The problem is that my vision is so vastly different than others, that it would be hard for us to work together. Other things like interface is also an issue, and portability. It seems I'm the only one who also is thinking about platform portability. With things like that, I'm on my own. Things like customization of langauge, I'm also the only one thinking about letting people customize the IDE so they can use whatever language or syntax they please. For a few more issues, people aren't willing to jointly develop. Join together Or use the best one... no other choice (besides writing your own). _Shawn
Posted on 2001-02-14 14:26:00 by _Shawn
Shawn is right. We have talked together, and we don't agree on certain issues. Most importantly we don't even agree on the language to use. I would love more than anything for everyone to come together and work on one. But as i've heard from many people, it has to be a one man project. Although i do have a few helping on the side, so far for the most part it's just me. Everyone has a different vision for their own IDE. And i hope each person's IDE can yield something useful for the asm community.
Posted on 2001-02-14 14:54:00 by Jon Richardson
I agree... this is the problem. Everyone has their own vision and it seems that while everyone is asking for a united project effort, even open source, if everyone who can create an IDE won't agree, then there's no point wasting the effort. One's heart only goes into the one that fits the vision. If an IDE is all-in-one and isn't cumbersome or arcane, then people are more likely to use it than many others which collectively offer the same features. IDE's with Bells and whistles appeal more to beginners. It appears to me (correct me if I'm wrong, just don't slam me) that experienced and/or hardcore asm programmers would prefer Notepad (so-to-speak). Why, they don't like being second guessed, they don't like a program writing their program for them. Newbies, on the other hand, prefer it because it takes the sting out of learning it. The point here, is that a unified project effort isn't likely unless people are willing to comprimise to the point where agreements can be made. As for me, I want my IDE to appeal to more than just assembly programmers. For that reason, I will be hardpressed to find some willing helpers (at least until the IDE proves itself). I'm just specifically choosing to beef it up for MASM/MASM32. _Shawn
Posted on 2001-02-14 16:12:00 by _Shawn
IDE's with Bells and whistles appeal more to beginners. It appears to me (correct me if I'm wrong, just don't slam me) that experienced and/or hardcore asm programmers would prefer Notepad (so-to-speak). Why, they don't like being second guessed, they don't like a program writing their program for them. Newbies, on the other hand, prefer it because it takes the sting out of learning it. The point here, is that a unified project effort isn't likely unless people are willing to comprimise to the point where agreements can be made. As for me, I want my IDE to appeal to more than just assembly programmers. For that reason, I will be hardpressed to find some willing helpers (at least until the IDE proves itself). I'm just specifically choosing to beef it up for MASM/MASM32. _Shawn
hardcore != smartcore? smart programmers let the computer do their grunt work focussing on the more important areas. So what win32asm needs is a RAD designer that makes windows in code calls, so that you retain full control. And I'll take Borland C++Builder over Notepad any time. Basically I think that making yet another CodeWarrior(TM) application won't do the win32asm scene much good. It won't hurt, certainly not but I don't think it will be a step forward in the evolution of things win32asm. This message was edited by Hiroshimator, on 2/14/2001 11:41:50 PM
Posted on 2001-02-14 23:35:00 by Hiroshimator
I get the idea from the range of different tastes mentioned here as well as what I have seen before that editors/IDEs are something like preferences in girlfriends, now if everybody had a taste in brunettes, it would leave more blondes for me which would be a good thing. Fortunately (for all the blondes) the range of tastes are very varied and I suggest that editor/IDE preferences are much the same. I once used an IDE that I detested so much that I swore I would never use anything else except a pure ascii editor again. I code in Quick Editor because its FAST at everything, thats what it was meant to be, it can be configured to run almost any tools and can be extended with its own plugin DLL interface to making its own tools and toys. With this new rash of IDEs, I would suggest making them as flexible as possible so that they can be configured to suit the individual tastes of the user. If you can suffer the performance loss and the eyestrain, syntax colouring is a current fashion that many seem to want. Auto-indenting improves the coding speed and flexibility in project layout would be useful. As far as the suggestion of an "all in one" IDE, I think that is a mistake, diversity addresses the different range of people and tastes, closed system IDEs do not and its why they are not that popular with older asm programmers. When you are old and grumpy and have been at it for years, you can dump these kiddies toys and use TheGun. :) Regards, hutch@pbq.com.au
Posted on 2001-02-15 00:27:00 by hutch--
where is it written that a visual IDE always brings performance loss?
Posted on 2001-02-15 00:37:00 by Hiroshimator
I've added a feature to turn on and off the syntax highlighting, unfortunately I won't be able to program any more until saturday. But it will support command line options by next week for file affiliations. Also the right hand click on the edit boxes will popup a menu. If there is any text selected it will popup the edit menu (Cut, Copy, Paste, etc...) if nothing is selected it will popup the macros menu or something similar. See ya next week, Ben P.S. Hutch: Adding visual "anything" to any program will bring performance loss. Then you just require a faster computer! He, he, he... ;P I have some original dos ascii editors that are less than 1kb! Now we have programs written in VB that are >3mb!
Posted on 2001-02-15 00:53:00 by cyberben
Hutch has some good points. But I think the fact that it's "visual" alone diminishes performance in some way, as it takes resource and overhead to manage those hWnd's and stuff. Now, as for the IDE itself, it's possible to make a good IDE with useful features and not be rediculously slow. Such a tool won't be adopted as widely as one that doesn't. I, for one, happen to like syntax highlighting. However, I didn't start with it (on the Apple //e). Nonetheless, a more useful feature would be one that flagged you of certain obvious errors before you attempt to compile, would be much more useful. Syntax coloring is useful when you don't have pink and purple identifiers and blue keywords with read numerals and gray text with green comments and lavender class identifiers or perhaps brown registers and orange hexadecimals on top of yellow this or that... mixed with flourescent HTML tags and lime XML with sivler javascript... get my point? Keep it simple and extensible is the key. I agree with Hutch on that. I also agree that some IDE's are so detestable that it makes sense not to use "it", however, others are great. I also agree that the more features it sports, the more performance of the application itself drops. As they also said in the Navy, "Work smarter, not harder". _Shawn
Posted on 2001-02-15 10:54:00 by _Shawn
mixed with flourescent HTML tags and lime XML with sivler javascript
HGrpf...drooool
Posted on 2001-02-15 11:29:00 by Hiroshimator
Nice logic, Hutch! Cyberben, anyone of us could make an ascii editor in asm which will be 3 kb. Finally, when people work together, they can accomplish more, so all the features that you want AND don't want can be implemented in a short time span. There's no need to argue, cause almost everything can be satisfied. For example, if you want it for MASM and someone wants it for NASM, each one of the two can work on his part and then you just put them together.
Posted on 2001-02-15 11:43:00 by Hel
I like what Hel has to say. _Shawn
Posted on 2001-02-15 13:03:00 by _Shawn
Ummmm...... I said that some many posts up. The IDE is going to be developed my more than me! I think this post is starting to run off track, furthor discusion about IDE's should maybe start a new thread. Cause I'm starting to see posts from people who haven't read all the other posts above (Not that I think they should have, it just means they are suggesting things that have already been said.) I've got plans for the IDE now, the webpage will be up soon, and you can all visit it. If you don't care about the IDE don't visit the site... simple as that. :D Thanks for all those comments and suggestions and ideas and anything else you may have contributed! :cool: Thanks again, Ben :cool:
Posted on 2001-02-15 21:17:00 by cyberben
I guess that if someone could make a fully customized IDE, where the user could configue the IDE to his own liking, then you would have a good IDE. I have stoped working on mine cuz I have read all the different peoples likes ect. and it just made me lose all interest in making one. I guess a programmer needs to know that what he is writting is worthwhile. I won't start working on my IDE untill I find someway to make everyone happy. So untill then I am the only user of my IDE called Altra32 cuz I guess I like it. If anyone knows of any idea that would make a IDE satisfy everyone let me know.
Posted on 2001-03-08 14:11:00 by Zcoder
Well, you can't make everyone happy. You'll depress yourself trying to. Guess that's why there are 10 different IDE's in development, because each has plans to support some features, but not the others. For that reason, someone thinks "hey, I want that feature" so they create their own support for that feature. Before you know it, there are so many IDE's that few get any wide support and people simplify back to QEdit, Edit, Notepad, and whatever... why? Because it's simple, it does what they need, doesn't second guess them, and doesn't try to dictate to the user what the user wants/needs. The best IDE would be one that dictates nothing to the user, but has functionality enough ready to be at the users beckoning when/if needed. An even better IDE would be one that could be as complete as Delphi/VC++ combined or as complete as Notepad, depending on how the users wants to set it up. Those are the ones that will survive, of course, it is "all things to all people" and goes back to youre "can't satifsy everyone" remark, because it's true, you can't... Of course, the third level of best IDE would be the one that has commercial motivation behind it (until it monopolizes the market). But why pay when you can make youre own 20 different endeavors, for free? That's part of the fun of being an assembly programmer, you have the chance to make you're own without requiring millions of man hours worth of work. Par for the course... _Shawn
Posted on 2001-03-08 16:04:00 by _Shawn
Hi, I know this was suggested before and it was cut down because it was felt that it curtail creativity and ultimitly result in a lowerer quality product, but I think its the only way to go. Work Together If one or two people work on a code editor with intelisense and everything else then they can make a great editor, its hard to do better than a good editor if you have everything else to do as well. Someone else could work on a resource editor and again by concentrating on that alone make the best one possible. All of these thing would be modular aspects of an IDE, someone else could work on the shell that hold everything. And lets not forget a debuger, etc ...you know yourselves. In my opinion a truly great IDE is not achievable by 1 person, look at linux, its a colaboration and its reached the stage where it can take on microsoft. And take another lesson from Linux, make it open source.
Posted on 2001-03-08 18:06:00 by Zadkiel
Zadkiel, You gotta be kidding saying we should work together on this. Go back and look at the threads about what the project files should be. I couldn't even get people to agree on what should be saved for a single FILE (no less get them to stay on just that one topic). Seccond point: (and I mean no slight on anyone in particular when I say this): I've seen some 'pre-release' versions already, and the most notable quote (which I am NOT direrctly quoting, but going from memory to further obscure who said this) is " Here's the program. X, Y, and Z features are all working. I'll next be working on the project manager." Next? What is an IDE but a project manager? Seems to me someone got a bright idea and ran off to code it. That means the most importaint step was skipped: it was never designed. I spent a full weekend defining what modules (they are all COM classes) my project will need. I had the barest of bones of a MDI interface coded at that point (with some lovely docking toolbars I had previously worked on). The program mostly consisted of Icz's MDI tutorial code. Now, with everyone tugging different directions jumping into code without a clue, you think different people could code parts that would run together and impliment one common shared vision? I doubt it would get beyond linking. The only way we will share anything on the IDE is if people publish tutorials on some neet aspect of their thing. Make custom controls and give em away so other can use em. Face it, we all gotta be oddballs to begin with to love ASM coding. :-)
Posted on 2001-03-08 19:43:00 by Ernie